So what OP is trying to say is that Wii reviews should be given inflated scores because it is already known that Wii cannot compete with 360 and PS3 on a hardware level? That's a load of crap.
There's a reason why Nintendo's own first party titles (on average) are head and shoulders above everything else on the Wii, because Nintendo are making sure to cover all their bases (honestly, Super Mario Galaxy was a beautiful game, graphically and artistically. Ditto MP3).
To give Wii games a higher score for having good gameplay and crappy graphics would be as biased as giving a game like Army of Two high scores because it has good visuals but does exactly the same thing as every shooter in the past 3 years.
A Game should only be reviewed 80%+ (or whatever arbitrary value) if it is a well-rounded package. OP himself said Top Spin 3 visuals suck, therefore it is not a complete package like say Zack and Wiki or De Blob is, and should be reviewed as such.
I've played very few Wii games that I felt got a score lower then they deserved, and I've played alot of them. I honestly would not give a game a higher review just because waggle seems fresh, when clearly motion controls are one of the few things the game has going for it, if it's well implemented that's a different story, but just for being there when expected (like a tennis game using the wii-mote as a racquet) is as bad as giving a FPS higher marks for having a cross-hair.
One last thing, a review is the WRITER'S opinion, you can choose to ignore it like I can choose to ignore what you've said, or like how you can choose to ignore what I've said.
You can't have emphasis on one category of your review or you truly will hold bias, Nintendo didn't up the visuals from last gen too much, but that's no excuse for Wii games to look like they came from early last gen.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
